Paul Craig Roberts: "America Is A Gulag"

[hjulenissen]

..As an elementary school teacher, I have read about a very progressive whole child approach to education in I believe Finland.  It seems to work. Scandinavia has an incredibly high literacy rate...

I believe that education in Finland is quite different from other Scandinavian countries.

They do well on the PISA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PISA_2012, international testing of 15 year olds), other Scandinavian countries do not score as well.

Of course, the debate is if these tests are relevant, if such testing can ever measure the "goodness" of an education system, and if having more "hard" classes is the answer. What is the moral and economical consequence of failing to give a future extremist a proper education, vs helping the majority to excel in maths?

Meanwhile, in my own country, the most heated debate in school politics is if the religious classes should be called "religion, life stance and ethics" or "christianity, religion, life stance and ethics". Supporters of the latter won. Sigh. Next, we will have "geometry and maths", "running and gym" and "pizza and home economics". We seriously need laws that make a clear separation of church and state.

-h

[AlterEgo]

Now you respond and call me a socialist / commie 

litmus test - do you think that your pay raise shall be more than parents of the kids you teach have ? or that somehow your community owes you a defined benefits plan vs defined contribution plan... if so then you are certainly the one.

[spidermike]

Nobody who has not seen it can possibly understand the all-encompassing nature of the totalitarian state in which Americans live.

It always bemuses me when people talk about living in a 'totalitarian society'. Anyone who has travelled to any length outside NA and Western Europe will realise what freedoms we actually have - I am not saying it is perfect in Europe or US and there is an awful lot to improve, but saying there is stuff to improve is a world away from saying we live in a totalitarian society. I would even go do far as saying it is an insult to those who are.

[spidermike]

litmus test - do you think that your pay raise shall be more than parents of the kids you teach have ?

How does that qualify you as being socialist/commie?

I was gobsmacked when one American in all seriousness said that Canada is a Marxist state and Europe is definitely communist - all based on the fact we dare to have socialised healthcare. I suppose it is not surprising when even left wing politics in US is still somewhat to the right in European terms.

[AlterEgo]

Anyone who has travelled

as we say - do not mix tourism and emigration/immigration  ...

[AlterEgo]

How does that qualify you as being socialist/commie?

me - no, I work in a purely capitalist enterprise - nothing granted/no trade unions/you don't make your targets you are out... but you did not answer the question 

PS: I was born in USSR and spent 50% of my life there, while it was still USSR, so I can really compare things not as a tourist 

[spidermike]

me - no, I work in a purely capitalist enterprise - nothing granted/no trade unions/you don't make your targets you are out... but you did not answer the question 

PS: I was born in USSR and spent 50% of my life there, while it was still USSR, so I can really compare things not as a tourist 

When I said 'you' I meant it in terms of the general that than yourself in particular.
I am not the one your original question was aimed at but was wondering about the thinking behind your definition of socialist/commie:
-  a teacher wanting to be paid more than the parents of their pupils 
-  someone wanting defined benefits versus defined contribution pension

[Jeremy Roussak]

It always bemuses me when people talk about living in a 'totalitarian society'. Anyone who has travelled to any length outside NA and Western Europe will realise what freedoms we actually have - I am not saying it is perfect in Europe or US and there is an awful lot to improve, but saying there is stuff to improve is a world away from saying we live in a totalitarian society. I would even go do far as saying it is an insult to those who are.

Either you didn't bother to follow the link in my message or you have no sense of irony at all. That lack is sometimes said to be an American failing, but the Onion is an American site. You've made yourself look either lazy or silly.

Jeremy

[AlterEgo]

-  a teacher wanting to be paid more than the parents of their pupils 
-  someone wanting defined benefits versus defined contribution pension

that's when you are trying to avoid market realities... and teachers unions (their members) do - their output does not correspond with our input... that also goes towards any municipal/state/federal employees too...

[spidermike]

that's when you are trying to avoid market realities... and teachers unions (their members) do - their output does not correspond with our input... that also goes towards any municipal/state/federal employees too...

Odd. I thought avoiding market realities was the province of the banks. the archetypal capitalist tool 

But I always though socialism was about who owns means of production not who wants to go silly with wage claims.

[spidermike]

Either you didn't bother to follow the link in my message or you have no sense of irony at all. That lack is sometimes said to be an American failing, but the Onion is an American site. You've made yourself look either lazy or silly.

Jeremy

Or perhaps I do actually understand irony and was extending it with a personal anecdote.
Maybe I should have started my post with 'How witty you are ' 

[tom b]

I live in Sydney. We don't have gangs, guns or a a lack of a security net. Perhaps that's why Australian cities are on the top of the most liveable cities in the world.

What worries me is that recent conservative governments seem to be copying US politics, why copy a failed system?

Cheers,

[mezzoduomo]

I live in Sydney. We don't have gangs, guns......

Major points taken, but then there's this regarding gangs:

"Armed robberies also occur, and while firearms are sometimes used, the more common weapon utilized is a knife or other cutting implement, which also accounts for 59 percent of murders throughout NSW. Australia has extremely restrictive firearms legislation, which makes the purchase, possession, licensing, and storage of firearms very difficult when compared to U.S. jurisdictions. Most gun-related incidents involved drive-by and targeted shootings, stemming from outlaw motorcycle gang turf wars and drug-related disputes with organized crime gangs. In general, gun-related violence in Sydney has remained stable over 2014 and is remarkably low when compared to major U.S. cities."

Source: https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=17811

[tom b]

The NRA has targeted Australia because of it's highly successful gun restrictions. There has not been a mass shooting since the Howard conservative government introduced new laws after the Port Arthur massacre.

American gangs see Australia as a soft target, luckily we seem to be resisting the attack. Any gang violence seems to be between a couple of American based gangs.

Living in one of the most liveable cities in the world is fantastic. I have great superannuation, I don't worry about getting sick or attacked. One of the keystones is our government has put in measures to protect us.

Cheers,

[Jeremy Roussak]

Or perhaps I do actually understand irony and was extending it with a personal anecdote.

I ruled out that explanation, given that there was no "personal anecdote" in your post. I think I'll stick to my original possibilities.

Jeremy

[BernardLanguillier]

You should be asking those other nations how they manage corruption

To start with, all other developped nations prevent corruption by making illegal the funding of political parties by private entities (lobbies, companies,...)?

Pretty much everything else is the result of this single breach. You've got to laugh at how naive the belief in the relevance of freedom of speech/freedom of initiative as a proof of the democratic nature of the US is.

http://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim

Cheers,
Bernard

[spidermike]

I ruled out that explanation, given that there was no "personal anecdote" in your post. I think I'll stick to my original possibilities.

Jeremy

You mean the bit where I said (without reference to a television program or magazine article)

I was gobsmacked when one American in all seriousness said that Canada is a Marxist state and Europe is definitely communist

[hjulenissen]

I think that some people forget that most (western) economies are actually a mix between capitalism and centrally planned economics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

When one realize that the US and e.g. Scandinavia are different in degree, not in nature (in this respect), utterances such as "socialist hell Sweden" would perhaps be moderated. My understanding of recent US history is that pure capitalism has not been the goal or politics of a number of notable presidents. Was not FDR as good a social-democrat as any Swede?

How much is the US state subsidizing cotton or sugar farmers with?  

-h

[hjulenissen]

To start with, all other developped nations prevent corruption by making illegal the funding of political parties by private entities (lobbies, companies,...)?

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/17/945983/-Socialist-Sweden-Beats-Capitalist-USA#

Sweden is the world’s second most competitive country, the World Economic Forum said in its annual ranking, hailing the Scandinavian country for its transparent institutions, efficient financial markets and the world’s strongest technological adoption.
Switzerland topped the overall ranking in The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011. Sweden overtook the US and Singapore this year to be placed 2nd overall.

Sweden benefits from the world’s most transparent and efficient public institutions, with very low levels of corruption and undue influence and a government that is considered to be one of the most efficient in the world, the report stated.

Sweden (and Europe) do have significant problems with integrating immigrants (perhaps we could learn a thing or two from the US?).

-h

[spidermike]

I don't think Europe have any more problems with immigrants than America - the difference is that the US is big enough that immigrants can easily be separated from people who don't like them. Though I am not sure what 'lessons' you think Europe can learn from US.
Taking Britain as an example, we go through cycles of handwringing agonies about how we are a divided society and (according to some) deeply racist - and overlaying this is the remnants of a post-colonial guilt that was very strong in the 1970s and 1980s. And yet I speak to people from other European countries, both European descent who have seen the racial problems in their own countries and non-European immigrants who have come from elsewhere in the EU and they say Britain is remarkably tolerant. One significant difference is that we are more willing to talk about it. I don't know if this is the same as other see us but it seems to me that sometimes you can be too close to the problem such that it looks worse than it really is.


I think Sweden (in fact any of the Scandinavian countries) is unusual in the population being relatively small. It is well known that as societies get larger, social structures tend to break down and I believe this happens at national level as well. In smaller societies it is more likely that the population will have a coherence in thinking that makes it easier to engender a national identity; they will tend towards an understanding and an appreciation of the 'common good' and more likely to appreciate the spirit of the laws as much as the letter of the laws. In turn this will tend towards greater tolerance. Larger populations start to fragment and lose that sense of cohesion - I think that is what you are seeing in Britain because of population density and US by its sheer size geographically as well as population. As a result you could introduce basically the same laws and systems and the way they are enacted can differ widely. There will always be those trying to take advantage in one way or another (at the top and bottom of the social scales) but the attitude of the general population will differ widely and set their own 'unwritten' limits for most people.